Message Boards » Food and Nutrition

TOPIC: 1200 calories sucks !!!

 
Ic_disabled_photos
Topic has been inactive for 30 days or more and images have been disabled.
Display All Images
March 23, 2013 1:58 PM
QUOTE:

QUOTE:

QUOTE:

As other people have mentioned, 1200 calories is not sufficient for most people, unless they're right around 5' tall, and already thin-ish.

Look at the roadmap -- You should never eat below BMR. Calculate your TDEE, and eat at 10-20% below. You'll lose weight and fat, especially if you add that to a lifting routine.

Good luck, and eat up!



Everyone keeps saying this. I'm 5'0, around 24-25% body fat, 120 pounds and my TDEE-20% is still 1600 calories. Just because you are small does not mean you require less calories. My BMR alone is 1285.

Glad you posted this - I know there are a lot of people around 5' tall here who eat 1500+ calories and are doing great!


I eat closer to 2000 pretty much every day and I'm 5'0 and 105 pounds!
March 23, 2013 2:06 PM
QUOTE:

... It's amazing that figuring my calorie needs, even sedentary with no activity says to take the BMR x1.2 and that gives me 1615 calories, Now I don't know if I can eat that much but why are the settings here so far off from what a person really needs?
Most of the time, it's because people put in too aggressive a weight loss goal. Like, 2 pounds a week when they don't really have that much to lose and should be setting it to .5 pound, or 1 pound at most. 1200 is the number MFP refuses to go below, no matter what people put in.
  6092675
March 23, 2013 3:13 PM
How did you get to the figure of 1200, OP? - I am only a bit taller than you, fair bit older if your profile pic is anything to go by and I set my figures to lightly active and 1/2 lb per week (as recomended for people with relatively small amount of weight to lose) - the program gives me 1540 plus exercise calories.

1540 is managable without hunger plus I eat back any excercise calories - at this point, 2 months in, have lost above my target of 1/2 lb week - have lost 3 kg in 2 months when 1/2 lb week would equate to roughly a kg a month. ( we are metric in Australia so my ticker shows in kg)
  35896585
March 23, 2013 3:28 PM
QUOTE:

QUOTE:

As other people have mentioned, 1200 calories is not sufficient for most people, unless they're right around 5' tall, and already thin-ish.

Look at the roadmap -- You should never eat below BMR. Calculate your TDEE, and eat at 10-20% below. You'll lose weight and fat, especially if you add that to a lifting routine.

Good luck, and eat up!



Everyone keeps saying this. I'm 5'0, around 24-25% body fat, 120 pounds and my TDEE-20% is still 1600 calories. Just because you are small does not mean you require less calories. My BMR alone is 1285.
I'm ten pounds more than you, same height. My BMR is 1313 and my TDEE-15% is 2000.
  24957793
March 23, 2013 3:35 PM
Add in 200, I mean the benefit of 200 less or more a day isn't much in the grand scheme of things so if you feel better with 200 more I think it would be worth it.
March 24, 2013 5:33 PM
Do TDEE-20% you will not regret it :)
  12539170
March 24, 2013 9:54 PM
Such great replys thanks everyone , though I really have no idea what those abbreviations mean haha :S
  18363240
March 24, 2013 10:00 PM
Definitely try things that are higher in protein. Legumes, hummus and whole grain crackers, etc.
Edited by metacognition On March 24, 2013 10:00 PM
  2830740
March 24, 2013 10:29 PM
Bump
March 25, 2013 7:09 AM
QUOTE:

Such great replys thanks everyone , though I really have no idea what those abbreviations mean haha :S

BMR = Basal Metabolic Rate - the amount of calories you burn doing absolutely nothing all day, a doctor would feed you this much if you were comatose, basically the minimum your body needs to keep your organs functioning.
TDEE = Total Daily Energy Expenditure - your BMR plus your daily activity - work, shopping, housework, exercise.

A lot of people find their numbers and take 20% off the TDEE for their daily goal, and you don't eat back exercise cals as they are included in your activity level. This method has worked great for me for losing the fat!

Much guidance in the link provided in my last post and by several other people - In Place Of A Road Map. Good stuff.
  6941661
March 25, 2013 7:32 AM
Unless someone has medical issues that they need to be eating so few calories at 1200 you are starving yourself. I've been at 1500 since before Christmas and average 1/2 - 1lb a week loss and that was with eating back my exercise calories. I've now incorporated my activity and have bumped up my intake to about 1750. You don't have to starve yourself to lose weight. Check out this site for info on the concept of eating more and there is also a group here on mfp regarding EM2LW.

http://eatmore2weighless.com/faqs/
  31886218
March 25, 2013 7:39 AM
MFP has my calories set at 1350, but I take the stance of "if your body is hungry, feed it". Don't be afraid to feed your body! Make wise decisions, and don't let yourself go hungry in hopes of seeing rapid results. Do what makes you feel your healthiest and "highest functioning".
  25738649
March 25, 2013 7:47 AM
QUOTE:

QUOTE:

QUOTE:

As other people have mentioned, 1200 calories is not sufficient for most people, unless they're right around 5' tall, and already thin-ish.

Look at the roadmap -- You should never eat below BMR. Calculate your TDEE, and eat at 10-20% below. You'll lose weight and fat, especially if you add that to a lifting routine.

Good luck, and eat up!



Everyone keeps saying this. I'm 5'0, around 24-25% body fat, 120 pounds and my TDEE-20% is still 1600 calories. Just because you are small does not mean you require less calories. My BMR alone is 1285.


Touche... Clearly that was a VAST generalization to make a point... that was further illustrated by your input wink
1200 really is TOO low for most people


It's just a caveat to cover bases. It irks me a bit when people say "unless you have a medical condition you aren't sedentary" because I have several medical conditions that affect mobility and I'm still not sedentary. But I understand the need for qualifiers. Some short people and some people with medical conditions may find that 1200 is appropriate. Most will not.
  4822651
March 25, 2013 7:54 AM
I take a few tbsp of coconut oil as a supliment. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medium_chain_triglycerides Amazing stuff.
  7149085
March 25, 2013 8:03 AM
Something else you have to remember with MFP, the calories they set for you are BASE calories. If you use their set up, your deficit is already built into the calories they set for you. If you do any exercise, you are supposed to eat those calories back to maintain your set deficit, otherwise you're just building a bigger hole. Depending on how much or how little you have left to lose you could stall our your weight loss by creating too big a deficit. Do you notice that when you log exercise, your calorie goal changes? MFP expects you to eat those calories back.

Though the problem some people run into is how accurate are the calculations for the calories you burned?
  16352892
March 25, 2013 9:10 AM
I am new here. If I understand it correctly it is set at 1200 net calories, not gross calories. In a nutshell it means we are supposed to eat back calories burned. I did a bootcamp and estimated about 400 calories burned. so my net would be 1200 plus 400= 1600. Feel free to correct me like I said its how I understand it. Anyway, I will find out on Sunday if it works!
March 25, 2013 9:53 AM
QUOTE:

QUOTE:

QUOTE:

As other people have mentioned, 1200 calories is not sufficient for most people, unless they're right around 5' tall, and already thin-ish.

Look at the roadmap -- You should never eat below BMR. Calculate your TDEE, and eat at 10-20% below. You'll lose weight and fat, especially if you add that to a lifting routine.

Good luck, and eat up!




Everyone keeps saying this. I'm 5'0, around 24-25% body fat, 120 pounds and my TDEE-20% is still 1600 calories. Just because you are small does not mean you require less calories. My BMR alone is 1285.

Glad you posted this - I know there are a lot of people around 5' tall here who eat 1500+ calories and are doing great!


Totally agree, please eat more, your entire body needs more nutrition!
March 25, 2013 9:54 AM
QUOTE:

I am trying to stay at the 1200 calorie goal but I feel like its not enough. I am always hungry and I don't know if it's just a subconscious thing. What are some great vegetarian friendly foods that will make my bottomless pit seem a little less bottomless :)


it's not. your title is very correct.
  20419576
March 25, 2013 9:55 AM
probably cause it isn't enough! especially if you are working out most of us need at least 1500 in reality
  14587992
March 25, 2013 9:57 AM
You are too right, 1200 calories DOES suck!!! It just does!
  685635
March 25, 2013 9:58 AM
You're a vegetarian and you finding it hard? Just what exactly are you eating...? Veg and fruit are pretty low cal and I'm finding 1200 is easy as hell.
  37100208
March 25, 2013 9:59 AM
QUOTE:

QUOTE:

As other people have mentioned, 1200 calories is not sufficient for most people, unless they're right around 5' tall, and already thin-ish.

Look at the roadmap -- You should never eat below BMR. Calculate your TDEE, and eat at 10-20% below. You'll lose weight and fat, especially if you add that to a lifting routine.

Good luck, and eat up!


^^this! I'm 5'0" (151 pounds) and did not do well on 1200. Currently eating between 1500-1700 and losing inches with weight training.

Also, there is really good info at this group.

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/forums/show/10067-eat-train-progress-

Everyone keeps saying this. I'm 5'0, around 24-25% body fat, 120 pounds and my TDEE-20% is still 1600 calories. Just because you are small does not mean you require less calories. My BMR alone is 1285.
  27445807
March 25, 2013 10:00 AM
if you don't have much more weight to lose you could just up your calorie intake and lose slower for sanity's sake
March 25, 2013 11:02 AM
QUOTE:

I am new here. If I understand it correctly it is set at 1200 net calories, not gross calories. In a nutshell it means we are supposed to eat back calories burned. I did a bootcamp and estimated about 400 calories burned. so my net would be 1200 plus 400= 1600. Feel free to correct me like I said its how I understand it. Anyway, I will find out on Sunday if it works!


Yes. That is how the site sets up our calorie goals.
March 25, 2013 11:05 AM
1200 calorie intake isn't for me either... while some people may be satisfied on it... I get hangry, cranky, and tired... I upped my calories to around 1550 (which is around 20%-TDEE for me) and I feel MUCH better.. and I still lose more than .5 a pound a week this way.

Reply

Message Boards » Food and Nutrition

Posts by members, moderators and admins should not be considered medical advice and no guarantee is made against accuracy.